Whistleblower hotline: (213) 785-6098

Thursday, July 20, 2006

"Affordable" Compared To What?

The next time someone bemoans the high cost of housing in L.A., ask him: "High compared to what?"

It's more expensive to live in big cities than in little ones. That is normal. That is life. Is L.A. more expensive than other comparable cities?

Survey says . . . "NO!"

In June 2006, Mercer Human Resources Consulting reported the results of its cost-of-livng survey, which "covers 144 cities across six continents and measures the comparative cost of over 200 items in each location, including housing, transport, food, clothing, household goods and entertainment."

Moscow was the most expensive big city, with a score of 123.9; New York was No. 10, with a score of 100. Where did L.A. fit in? It was behind Tokyo, London, Paris, Singapore, Hong Kong, Zurich, Milan, Rome, Beijin, Tel Aviv, Helsinki, Vienna, Sidney, Taipei -- you get the idea. Los Angeles was No. 25 on the list, with a score of 86.7.

Still want to whine about the cost of housing? Still think we have a "crisis" that justifies raising our taxes? When you compare apples to apples, you get a different picture, huh?


Blogger Walter Moore said:

I am delighted that all the "affordable housing" advocates are rendered speechless by the facts set forth in this posting. Hard to argue with the facts, isn't it?

Now all we have to do is start using a more accurate name for "affordable housing" programs, like "developer subsidies."

July 22, 2006 8:58 AM  

Blogger ubrayj02 said:

Walter Moore,

You are the biggest baddest urban planning troll I have ever read, and I love it!

Your facts are irrelevant in this matter! Timbuktu could have the highest cost of living in the universe when compared with L.A. - it doesn't lessen the fact that we have a housing shortage in L.A. A little public subsidy of housing can go a long way towards stabilizing our economy, and protecting it against global economic trends that sends floods of people here every twenty years.

You and I both know that without taxes or subsidies, we could dramatically increase the amount of housing in our fair city: across the board upzoning would do the trick nicely.

When you get into office, give it a shot and see how the voters receive your idea!

July 22, 2006 10:47 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Walter Moore is a selfish greedy self-absorbed shit. Maybe next he'd like to take wheelchairs away from paraplegics.

July 24, 2006 12:40 AM  

Blogger Peter McFerrin said:

I didn't bother to respond to this thread until now because it's pretty pointless, and ubrayj02 neatly summed up my thoughts on the subject.

I think we should start by rezoning Walter's neighborhood as R-3. Oh, and Joel Kotkin's, too. Maybe eminent-domain his house and turn it into a 28-unit, 11-story luxury condo tower.

July 24, 2006 2:28 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Where does Wacko live anyway? Can someone with City access to ZIMAS look him up?

July 24, 2006 5:15 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home